To note the report and:

i)               Agree in principle that the current RBWM Hackney Carriage Driver and Vehicle Policy & Conditions and the RBWM Private Hire Driver and Vehicle Policy & Conditions be amended to require that all RBWM licenced hackney carriage and private hire drivers enable the Licensing team to check their DBS for new information every six months,

ii)              Agree that this should be consulted on with licenced drivers, operators and all interested parties to determine how this is best achieved, and  

iii)             Agree that final recommendations to introduce the six monthly DBS checks are brought to the next Licensing Panel on 13 February 2024 for final implementation.

Greg Nelson, Trading Standards and Licensing Manager outlined the report that was before the Panel. He stated that the report concerned the criminal records checks that officers carried out on licenced hackney carriage (HC) and private hire (PH) drivers. This was part of the Borough’s tests to see whether a driver was “fit and proper”, as set out in legislation, to have such a license. A licensing authority carry out criminal records checks on licenced drivers, and new applicants for a licence, via the Disclosure and Barring Service, or DBS, formerly known as the Criminal Records Office. He said that at present, checks on existing drivers’ DBSs were carried out every three years although other checks could be carried out as and when necessary.

Greg Nelson said that based on government requirements, the report sought changes to the process so that existing drivers’ DBSs were checked every six months. This would tie in with a move away from a paper-based DBS application process to an online process, in which RBWM was currently undergoing. The background to this, was the introduction in 2020 of the Department of Transport’s Statutory Taxi & Private Hire Vehicle Standards. The aims of this were to raise standards of public safety and protection in the HC and PH trades and to ensure that there was a consistent approach taken across the country in considering whether a driver was fit and proper to hold a licence. Licensing authorities were obliged to adopt the provisions of the Standard unless there were compelling local reasons not to do so. He then said that the borough adopted most of the requirements of the Standard in 2021 and this was followed by a review of existing licence holders to make sure that they complied with the requirements of the new Standard.

Greg Nelson made it clear to the panel that the obligation was on the licensing authority to carry out the six-monthly DBS checks on current licence holders, it was not an obligation on the drivers to produce a new DBS every six months. However, there was an obligation on the drivers for them to register with the DBS update service and allow the borough access to that service so that the checks could be carried out. He added that the borough was currently in the process of moving away from a paper-based DBS process to an on-line process. He referred to paragraphs 2.12 to 2.14 of the report, which stated that the process would be cheaper for drivers in the long run and far more efficient than the current paper system.

Greg Nelson then ended his submission by outlining the recommendations that were available for the panel to consider and vote on.

The Chair thanked Greg Nelson and invited Mr Sabir to address the panel as a registered speaker. He addressed the panel for 3 minutes.

Councillor Douglas asked what the borough’s policy was on DBS checks and whether or not they were purely conviction related. Greg Nelson replied by saying that one of the elements of the Department of Transport’s (DoT) Standard that the borough adopted in 2021, was that the borough were asked to make retrospective checks on existing drivers. The fit and proper test became a lot stricter, and for example, if a driver had a record of an offence of violence, the previous policy stated that the licencing authority would not consider that driver for 5 years. However, this was now 10 years under the new process. Any records of sexual violence meant that a driver would not be licenced at all. Each existing driver who this impacted was assessed on an individual basis, to which there was a very small number. Some licences were revoked, with some appeals still ongoing.

Greg Nelson added that if there was an accusation against a driver, action would not be taken against a driver unless there was evidence to base this on. The authority had a very good relationship with Thames Valley Police, with information being passed on between parties.

Councillor Baskerville wised to make clear the reasons behind why this was being proposed to come into effect and that it was the national government who were bringing this forward. Greg Nelson said that all local authorities were required to adopt all of the standards unless there were compelling reasons not too. The borough found no compelling reasons to not adopt them, hence why they were adopted.

Councillor Baskerville then asked if the licensing team had enough staff members to carry out the 6 monthly checks for over 1,000 RBWM licensed drivers. Greg Nelson replied by saying that they were extremely stretched, however if the annual fee and the automated process was adopted by the Licensing Panel, then this would assist in easing the burden on the licencing team.

Councillor Baskerville asked about cameras being installed into vehicles. Greg Nelson confirmed that not all vehicles had CCTV cameras installed in the borough’s vehicles as this came at a cost to the drivers. The borough had previously decided not to make it a mandatory addition.

Councillor K Singh asked if the law had been passed already and how long the authority had to implement it Greg Nelson confirmed it was not a piece of law, however the DoT would expect a report within 1 or 2 years as to how the authority had gotten on with the implementation.

Councillor Sharpe asked about the Council’s legal liability and what the penalty was if the Council did not adopt the standard. Greg Nelson said that the DoT had already asked the borough how they had gone about making changes. There was no direct penalty or action that the DoT could take against the borough if they had not implemented the changes. Councillor Sharpe said that taxi drivers were very important, however so was the safety of the borough’s residents. Greg Nelson agreed with his comments.

Councillor Story asked if the drivers were obligated to use the new automated system. Greg Nelson said that the borough had the obligation to carry out the checks every 6 months, however it was the driver’s responsibility to allow the borough access to this. The borough could not force the drivers to do this, however it would be a lot easier to do so with new drivers, as it was the start of the process. Councillor Story also agreed with the comments made by Councillor Sharpe. 

Councillor Wilson said that online systems were fairly reliable, but asked what protection existed to ensure that no issues occurred with it. Greg Nelson said that the company being suggested was recognised by the DBS and the Home Office, and therefore had a high level of data security.

Councillor Wilson said that if the drivers signed up to the 6 monthly DBS check, what incentive would be provided. Greg Nelson said that this would be covered in the consultation process and that it would be a benefit overall to drivers.

The Chair then gave clarity as to the costs that were being proposed to the drivers.

Councillor Douglas asked if he could propose a change in wording to recommendation ii) within the report with the addition of the words ‘and residents’. This was accepted as a reasonable amendment by Greg Nelson and the Panel.

Councillor Sharpe sought further clarity over the cost to the drivers and what access this gave the borough. Greg Nelson said that unless mandated within the policy, then theoretically the drivers could decide not to pay the fee, which would then need to be paid by the Council. 

Councillor K Singh asked if the fee could be left out of the proposal and if the policy could just state that all new and existing drivers must sign up to the system, for efficiency purposes. Greg Nelson said that without changing policy, drivers would be pushed towards the online system more so.

Oran Norris-Browne, Principal Democratic Services Officer, read out the motion that had been put forward by officers as per section 1 of the report, with the amendment that Councillor Douglas had made.

A motion was put forward by Councillor K Singh to accept the officer recommendations as set out in the report with the addition ‘and residents’ being included in ii). This was seconded by Councillor Wilson.

A named vote was taken.

AGREED: That the Licensing Panel noted the report and:

i)               Agreed in principle that the current RBWM Hackney Carriage Driver and Vehicle Policy & Conditions and the RBWM Private Hire Driver and Vehicle Policy & Conditions be amended to require that all RBWM licenced hackney carriage and private hire drivers enable the Licensing team to check their DBS for new information every six months,

ii)             Agreed that this should be consulted on with licenced drivers, operators all interested parties and residents to determine how this was best achieved, and

iii)            Agreed that final recommendations to introduce the six-monthly DBS checks were brought to the next Licensing Panel on 13 February 2024 for final implementation.